Maybe Constitution is due for a review

July 12, 2008

The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision on the regulation of handgun ownership suggests we may need a new Constitution. The U.S. Constitution is the oldest in the world. Most other countries have updated their constitutions to account for changes in technology, government and international law. Has our Constitution persisted because of exceptional foresight on the part of our nation's founders, or because of inertia? In 1787, as this young nation relied on pioneer settlers to conquer and defend territory from native peoples and European governments, the Second Amendment made sense. But it has little relevance in today's context, where we have national and state military and police forces, no significant challenges from outside forces and dense population settlements where handgun and other violence is a significant social problem. Numerous public health studies link handgun ownership to increased homicide rates. Having a gun in one's home actually decreases personal security. A national conversation on how our Constitution might be updated is in order. Maybe we'll decide that the Founding Fathers indeed got it right. But to continue to base our laws on the presumed intentions of unelected people writing more than 200 years ago denies us the chance to develop more responsive and informed public policy.

Jackie SmithSouth Bend

Advertisement

Iraq Now that Shell and Exxon/Mobil and BP are entering into "partnerships" with Iraq to drill all that light sweet crude, can we face reality and agree that this is the end game? This is what President Bush and Sen. John McCain mean when they say we are winning. What they mean is that Exxon is winning. Forty-one hundred dead American soldiers for oil. Not to bring gas prices down, no. These oil men are well aware how instability and war cause oil markets to skyrocket. More crude oil reserves for Exxon to sell at astronomically high prices. This is winning ... to a facist. Let's call it what it is, folks. Facism. Forty-one hundred dead soldiers to improve Exxon's bottom line. But wait, there's more good news. Seymour Hersch is reporting that Congress approved $400 million, late in 2007, on covert operations against Iran. Wake up, America! Do we have to make this same mistake again? And whose side is Congress on? Perhaps it's just a side-effect of spending $590 billion on defense. Gotta use those armaments somewhere. Too bad our troops can't get up-armored Humvees or body armor. Just ask the family of the 4,100th soldier to perish in Iraq.

John WiggsMishawaka

Don't drill There is pressure to drill for oil off our beaches or in Alaska in a wildlife area. These are bad ideas for several reasons: 1) Finding new supplies of petroleum will not bring the price of gasoline down. The price of gasoline is now more than $4 per gallon. It may go up, but nothing will ever bring it down. 2.) Every penny we spend looking for petroleum is a penny we will not spend to become energy independent. The way to become energy independent is to get away from petroleum. Mankind has used nearly half of all the petroleum in 100 years. If we keep on burning petroleum, we will be out in 100 years or less! 3) We use petroleum for many other products in many industries (including pharmaceuticals). What will you do when all the petroleum is gone and you are sick? Many of us have gasoline automobiles and years will pass before we can afford anything different. My husband and I drive a 16-year-old minivan. We live on a fixed income. The price of gasoline is a problem. Nevertheless, drilling for more oil is foolish. We must develop other energy sources!